OUG,

All the jawbone discovery means is that one species/breed of whale evolved over 4 million years instead of the 15 million they were all originally thought to. It may be the direct ancestor of today's whales or it may have been a dead end. The discovery debunks nothing except the creationist claim that the universe is 6000 years old and that macroevolution is impossible.

Tell me, what is the mechanism that renders macroevolution impossible and what is your evidence for it? It's high time you started providing some evidence for your beliefs, don't you think? Disproving evolution (even if that were what you were doing) doesn't prove the creationist position.

By the way, how does this negate the part of my post that you were quoting and responding to?

<<YOU LIST THREE STRENGTHS>>CAll them weak>>

Fallacies, oversimplifications and misrepresentations are never strengths and with your rebuttals to my claim regarding your use of these, we can now add sidestepping.

<<the your/youtube/link..said..nothing in dna...refutes FOSSILS>>

Correct. There is nothing about the DNA of the species of ape alive today that contradicts what the fossils suggest.

You're really drowning here, OUG.

<<The porcine (or pig)..heart is most similar..to the human heart,
and therefore represents..the best anatomical fit..for replacement.>>

Correct. That doesn't mean they're a closer relative than other apes, or an ancestor. It just means they've evolved to have similar hearts to ours.

You still haven't stated how your pig theory fits into the biblical creation story. So that makes pigs and apes breeding, and ancient whales that you need to explain - on top of the numerous other questions you've evaded.

you know me aj..i like to take things to the next level
so i googled..

*SAPIAN HEARTS COMPARED TO HUMAN*
AND IT WAS AN AMASSING COVer-up [conspiracy]..i found

IT might not be obvious till you look at Google IMAGES SEARCH

how hARD COULD BIT BE TO COMPARE A SAPIAN HEART TO YOUR homosapien[its not in spell check]..HEART..WHAt do we call a chimps heart

HOMOSAPIen chimp hearts..nothing either[but got twO SKULLS]
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTz3q051X1Z2JegpUPbwS3-fz3tZgehYX5Fg6rVDQBED585AAqzzyz72ak

FRUIt from the next search term
HUMAN CHIMP HEArt comparison
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT3MACNiRXswtRIw4Yo1xQ3UWQfwW2ifqqSGf2_VAmYvz5-gufuchu4qFk

http://listverse.com/2012/02/14/10-comparisons-between-chimps-and-humans/

A PROPer COMPARISON..Of evolution thesus//ape into huh?man
http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/348289/96633991/stock-vector-comparison-of-greatest-apes-skeleton-with-human-skeleton-gibbon-gorilla-chimpanzee-orangutan-96633991.jpg

it took billions of yeaRS TO MAKE THIS..[ape]
THEN ONLY 100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTcDxXOwayugH1ZZBeLItyskX_f30Rx64PZ1ux-ALvhzz-cNn31we5THQ

oh DEAR I HAVE COME FULL CIRCLE
back to the beginning OF THE PIg theory
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-3.html

PLEASE NOTE THE NEEDED CHANGES..FROM Chimp..
into chump[see..green colums right-hand side..]
LEARN SOMETHING..THE page leads to hybreds..but i cant learn it for you.

ANYHOW CHEERS..EH

AJ/QUOTE..<<..All the jawbone discovery means is that one species/breed of whale evolved over 4 million years instead of the 15 million they were all originally thought to.>>

LETS REFER TO..THE/LINK

QUOTE..<<>.Argentine paleontologist..said the fossilized archaeocete jawbone found in February dates back 49 million years. In evolutionary terms,..that’s not far off from the fossils of even older proto-whales from 53 million years ago..that have been found in South Asia and other warmer latitudes.>>..[faIL]

AS USUal/aj/truth..are far removed..
yet he uses this as a base for further attack..

<<..It may be the direct ancestor of today's whales or it may have been a dead end...The discovery debunks nothing except the creationist claim that the universe is 6000 years old and that macroevolution is impossible.>>

SEE HOW HE DONT GOT NUTHIN/..BUT THE OLD evolutionist REFUSAL/BY INFERENCE..of some myth Creation/OR WHATEVER HAPPENED over 6000 years

tell me clever pj..where does it say that in any holY BOOK?

its weak/as piss

<<>Tell me, what is the mechanism that renders macroevolution impossible>>..how can a cold blood fish..BY SM--ALL 'CHANGES'..become a warmblood animal beast/with legs and shoulderblades[your the onE SELLING ILLusion/its you what CLAIMS SCIENCE/ITS ME WHAT SAYS YOU GOT SCIENCE..WELL PRESENT IT.

but you dont got science
you got a theory/full of lies

<<and what is your evidence for it?>>

Mate..macro-EVOLUTION..INTO NEW GENUS.IS YOUR THEORY PAL
NOT MINE..yet his inner Inversion/perversion..goes ON

<<It's high time you started providing some evidence for your beliefs,>>

I HAVE
YOU REFUSE to read my links



<<>.You still haven't stated how your pig theory fits into the biblical creation story.>>

thats THE FUNNY THING/THEY HATE THE PIG THESES MORE THAN YOU
IM TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE/BIG STICK..THAT BRINGS THE FARCE DOWN

<<..So that makes pigs and apes breeding>>..breeding us/yep

<<..,and ancient whales..that you need to explain>>
NOT ME OL MATE..ITS Your theory..that tassie TIGERS EVOLVED INTO BAyleene MUNCHERS..not mine..

FOR THE 4 TH TIME..RE-ASK/ANY QUESTIONS/YOU THINK I HAVNT TRIED TO REPLY/JUST SAYING IM NOT REPLYING..ISNT TRUE..AS ANY READER CAN Know.

OUG,

I don’t really understand what you’re getting at in your first post. It seems to be a whole lot of the Argument from Incredulity fallacy.

One bit that I think I did understand, though, was this…

<<it took billions of yeaRS TO MAKE THIS..[ape]
THEN ONLY 100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]>>

Which ape? 100,000 years ago we were still Homo sapiens and looked pretty much like we do now.

<<PLEASE NOTE THE NEEDED CHANGES..FROM Chimp.. into chump>>

If you’re talking about chimps to humans, that never happened. We were never chimps.

As for your waffle regarding the whale jawbone, it negates none of what I said. It just points to potential gaps in knowledge (which is fallacious) and ends with a false claim of me sidestepping your point.

<<tell me clever pj..where does it say that [the universe is 6000 years old] in any holY BOOK?>>

It doesn’t explicitly say that, but that doesn’t mean that the chronology doesn’t imply it when interpreted from a creationist perspective. Of course, you already knew that.

<<how can a cold blood fish..BY SM--ALL 'CHANGES'..become a warmblood animal beast/with legs and shoulderblades>>

That’s not a mechanism. It’s an Argument from Incredulity fallacy (again), and an Argument from Ignorance fallacy too.

<<Mate..macro-EVOLUTION..INTO NEW GENUS.IS YOUR THEORY PAL>>

So? You’re the one claiming it’s impossible and that’s what was relevant to my question. Please try to keep up.

<<YOU REFUSE to read my links>>

I’ve read them and they prove absolutely nothing for the reasons that I state.

<<IM TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE/BIG STICK..THAT BRINGS THE FARCE DOWN>>

Only it doesn’t, and for the reasons that I’ve stated. About the best you’ve done is make invalid points regarding pig heart valves.

Either way, you miss my point. You accept the pig-ape-hybrid hypothesis as true (you’d have to, otherwise there would be no point in using it as evidence against evolution), yet it clashes with your creationist beliefs. The same goes for your whale jawbone point.

So my question remains unanswered and now sidestepped, as so many of them still do.

PJ/QUOTE..<<..pig-ape-hybrid hypothesi..There would be no point in using it..as evidence against evolution)>>

RUBBISH..YOU PRESUME APE/Evolved..into you
but..if pig..thats not aPE/THEN\..YOU STUFFED IT/UP..BADLY

[YOU EVEN RIDICULED..IT..ON THIS THREAD.

lol/buT THEN DENY,..my uses..of ape/chimp..[FOR YOUR/THEory]..but offer little ELSE ..So my..REPLIES..remains unanswered...and now sidestepped..again

<<..your first post...>..[HUh?..FIRST..OR last-post?]..RE<<..the Argument..from Incredulity fallacy...One bit ..I did understand,..was this…>>'..'<<it took billions..of yeaRS TO..MAKE THIS..[ape]
THEN ONLY..100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]>>..

AND what/was..your consigned..'question'..[rEPLY..<<..Which ape? 100,000 years ago..we were still Homo sapiens.and looked pretty much like we do now.>>...[AVOIDANCE?]..[ET'TU?]

[so..PJ..please/for once
STATE..WHEN chimp/whatever..became man
YOUR Science says 80/120,thousands of years ago..

[we just seen...you become CHUMP..become/now.try//BECOMING..a CHAMP..WRITE SOMETHING..as *your*statement..OF FACT]

so/you..SAID,,<<..chimps to humans,..that
never happened..We were never chimps......

lo..give me a lol..[we dont come from pigs?]..
like..we..were[NEVER CHIMPS..im seeing a explanation/Excuse..spin/RATHER THAN PROOF/OR eveN-REBUTAL

[NITT-wittING PICKING..STING..on terminology]

<<..As for your waffle regarding..the whale
jawbone,..it negates none of what I said.>>...

RUBBISH..PLEASE GO BACK..TO THE LINK
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-whale-of-a-problem-for-evolution-ancient-whale-jawbone-found-in-antartica/

scroll down/TO the evolution...schematic/picture
http://www.uncommondescent.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/whale-transition.gif

THAT Picture..represents..the theory..'evolution..of the whale from THE HIPPO/[not shown]..side evolving..INTO WOLF CONVERGENCE..begin.. supposedly..[65]MILLION YEARS AGO..BUT..IF..the result..[a whole WHALE..WAS PRESENT..50 million years ago..the other..'evolutions ARE OBVIOUSLY FRAUD..Invalidated..GET IT?

YOU..CANT CLAIM/THEM..AS STEPS
IF THE WHALE Is already there..before THEY..EVEN..'EVOLVED'

A 49 million year old,..fully aquatic ancient whale fossil..would clearly demonstrate..that the younger..so-called ‘transistional’ fossils were,..in fact,..nothing of the sort...To claim otherwise is science fiction.

If you think..you can..NOW..“tweak” Ambulocetus..back
into this FANCIFUL/picture..then think again.

..LETS TRY/for..the 7th TIME...With this new fossil find,..dating to 49 million years ago..(bear in mind..that Pakicetus lived around 53 million years ago),

this means that.the first fully aquatic whales..now date to around the time..when walking whales..(Ambulocetus)..first appear...LOL.

If this new fossil find is correct,..then this clearly demonstrates that the evolutionary whale tale..was science fiction,..not fact..

NOW..LETS get back..to Examining..the piggy fact's?
SEE..IF WE CAN/FIGURE OUT..HOW GOD DUn/it?

Fine, OUG. So you don’t believe the whole pig-ape-hybrid bit (I suspected you didn’t). That brings me to the next point then…

<<RUBBISH..YOU PRESUME APE/Evolved..into you
but..if pig..thats not aPE/THEN\..YOU STUFFED IT/UP..BADLY>>

If you don’t accept evolution or this scientifically impossible pig-ape-hybrid nonsense that you love so much, then, according to you, there is no stuff up because there was nothing to be stuffed-up to begin with. If a flat-earther decides that the earth has four corners instead of being disc-shaped, then did they stuff up? No, because nothing real has been corrected.

So your pig-ape-hybrid argument is a meaningless and insincere attempt to simply ridicule and embarrass.

Now who’s speaking rubbish?

<<..your first post...>..[HUh?..FIRST..OR last-post?]>>

The first of your last two, I meant. Sheesh.

<<it took billions..of yeaRS TO..MAKE THIS..[ape]>>

Again, which ape? All apes? Yes, including us.

<<THEN ONLY..100,000 YEARS TO MAKE THAT..[you]>>

Wrong. Check the video I linked to again. Your comprehension skills are appalling. And again, we’re still apes.

<<STATE..WHEN chimp/whatever..became man
YOUR Science says 80/120,thousands of years ago..>>

There is no definitive line. It’s a gradual process that occurs over millions of years. A human wasn’t just born one day. You still can't get your head around the fact that species don't give birth to other species. Yes, there is a 100,000 year mark that is spoken of but that doesn’t mean we were climbing trees and picking fleas off of each other’s backs 100,001 years ago.

As for your ‘whale jawbone’ nonsense, I already answered this in the first paragraph here… http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16065#280906